§ The result
Criteria leads Radancy by 12 points.
Criteria sits 12 points above Radancy under rubric v1.0 — 53 against 41 — with Criteria filed under Assessment and Radancy under Sourcing. Criteria leads 5 of the 7 criteria, including Article 11 Technical Documentation, while Radancy leads 1, including Human Oversight Design, and 1 is level. Criteria takes the heaviest weighted swing, Article 11 Technical Documentation at 20% (Criteria 68, Radancy 42), which is 43% of the weighted advantage Criteria holds; the widest raw gap is a different criterion, Bias Audit Transparency, Criteria 48 to Radancy 20.
Vendor profile
Criteria
Criteria is a pre-employment assessment platform offering scientifically validated cognitive aptitude, personality, emotional-intelligence and skills tests, plus structured and AI-assisted interview tools, used to evaluate and rank job candidates.
Vendor profile
Radancy
Radancy is an enterprise talent acquisition cloud combining recruitment marketing, career sites and CRM with agentic AI that sources, screens, scores, ranks and schedules candidates, including one-way video screening inherited from its myInterview acquisition.
§ The record
Criteria is filed under Assessment AI, Radancy under Candidate sourcing AI. They also share 2 secondary categories: Screening and Video interview.
Both are in scope of NYC LL 144, Illinois HB 3773, EU AI Act, Colorado AI Act and Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Criteria | Radancy |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | US | US |
| Founded | 2006 | 2006 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 42% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Criteria 68 · Radancy 42
5.2 weighted points to Criteria
18% weight · 83% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Criteria 48 · Radancy 20
5.0 weighted points to Criteria
12% weight · 89% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Criteria 42 · Radancy 36
0.7 weighted points to Criteria
15% weight · 94% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Criteria 32 · Radancy 28
0.6 weighted points to Criteria
15% weight · 99% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Criteria 62 · Radancy 58
0.6 weighted points to Criteria
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Criteria 56 · Radancy 57
0.1 weighted points to Radancy
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 6 figures above sum to +12.0 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 12.3 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +12 beside that +12.0.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Criteria minus Radancy.
| Category | Weight | Criteria | Radancy | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 68 | 42 | +26 | +5.2 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 48 | 20 | +28 | +5.0 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 32 | 28 | +4 | +0.6 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 62 | 58 | +4 | +0.6 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 56 | 57 | -1 | -0.1 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 42 | 36 | +6 | +0.7 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 60 | 60 | - | - |
| Total | 100% | 53 (F) | 41 (F) | +12 | +12.0 |
§ Evidence
Cited sources and documented absences, criterion by criterion.
An absence is a finding, not a blank: the reviewer looked for a named artefact and recorded that it is not located. Where a source sits is a fact about hosting only.
| Criterion | Weight | Criteria | Radancy | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 1 | 1 | — | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 14 | 4 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 16 | 6 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
Criteria has 18 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 14 with a source URL, 4 documented absences; Radancy has 22 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 16 with a source URL, 6 documented absences.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 40 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 18 for Criteria, across 1 distinct source domain, and 22 for Radancy, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Criteria last reviewed
- June 7, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Radancy last reviewed
- August 2, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
HireAIScore scores are editorial research, not legal advice, and no vendor pays for placement, scoring or removal — see the methodology, conflicts policy and terms.
§ Where next